canon rebel T2i vs sony slt A55

does both d cameras have d same picture quality?

Any differences would be indiscernable to anyone but a very ardent critic or pro. All entry level DSLRs have the ability to perform much better than the person behind the camera can. The biggest difference in image quality will be by learning about photography(composition, exposure, etc) and taking control of the camera, instead of the camera taking care of everything.

It's the other features that you have to think of when buying a DSLR to tell the difference between each, or DSLT when talking about the A55.

IMO, the Sony's image quality is slightly better at high ISO, but only just. Since it is so close, I think how the camera feels in your hand and what you think of the user interface is more important. Here are two more reviews:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/T2I/T2IA.HTM

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA55/AA55A.HTM

From the point of building up with either of these systems as base, which one would be more versatile and economical?

The Sony SLT A55 is the first generation of a new type of camera with a translucent mirror. It is great for HD video with a fast AF but you still have to deal with the shallower depth of field (focusing on the wrong area). It is fast but you cannot see what you are taking while it is in the fast burst (per review), and has an annoyingly long recovery. So while the specs look good, it still has a lot of room to improve. You may want to wait for 2 more generations before jumping into this type of cameras. The same can be said about the micro 4/3 and Sony's NEX line.

Overall at this time it is still easier for Canon and Nikon to find compatible third party wares to suit your specific shooting style and need, especially if you do tethered shooting, underwater photography, or like to use special third party softwares.

However, Sony may have some interesting potentials in the future. Sony has a full line of lenses inherited from Minolta and also has some high end new lenses from Carl Zeiss. So you will not likely be handicapped by lack of equipment choice, unless you have some special unusual need as mentioned above.

If you have a keen interest in doing a lot of HD movies with cameras, then Sony may have some potential advantage. But it is still a little too premature to have a clear overall winner at this time. I think it's fair to say at this point that most major manufacturers are on par in terms of image quality. The MP war is pretty much over. The low light performance is also reaching a point that it depends on the type of lens used rather than which camera body is used. Now we are at an interesting milestone when manufacturers are developing new camera designs, to create unique breeds of digital large sensor interchangeable lens cameras that abandon its umbilical tie to the old SLR cameras. But which design will reign supreme, nobody knows.

Newer camera designs are now focusing on reducing camera size. This may turn out like the computers and cell phones in the old days. The new laptops and smartphones nowadays are much smaller and much more capable than those old "top-of-the-line" monster models that can herniate your spine or break someone's skull in self defense. So it seems that photographers now do have a choice to carry something less bulky without sacrificing image quality. Years from now I may wonder why I ever carry those heavy camera body and monster lenses that can herniate my back and break someone's skull.

So which system should you choose depends on your experience and need. If you are a newby, then you have a few different options to consider. The new breed of interchangeable cameras open up some interesting options, but these 1st and 2nd degeneration models are more or less prototypes that need some more refinement. If you are adventurous and like to try new things, you can certainly jump into these need breed cameras. If you have already developed the skills of SLR, then sticking with the traditional models may cut down the learning curve.

@hjfok: Thanks for sharing your insights! This is quite helpful. I am a newby and have been spending a lot of time offlate in figuring out which option to go for. I am not planning to shoot videos a lot and therefore I guess it would make more sense to stick to tried and tested before jumping to the new tech.
Thanks again!

Sony has some features that will enable you a smooth migration from a point-and-shoot camera to a more professional one. First and foremost the quick live view feature (which was also available in their older DSLR cameras) - this gives you the ability to shoot using the LCD screen (as you do in a p&s camera) without loosing the high speed auto-focus. The new SLT line also offer some nice features for the newbie such as sweep panorama (which uses the high burst mode) that lets you easily shoot panoramas without going back to the computer and doing the photo-stitching yourself. Another advantage these cameras have is the in-body image stabilization which enables you to use it with any lens you attach to it (for example, I have some old Minolta lenses that I use with it).

I think the exact brand or manufacturer is not a factor. A newbie will do about the same whichever brand is picked. The limiting factor will be the knowledge and skill of the newbie, not the camera equipment.

The most important thing a newbie needs to learn (other than how to turn on the camera and use the controls) is to learn good photographic techniques, eg. how to hold the camera steadily, how to compose, how to adjust exposure, depth of field, focus, etc. Better techniques will improve photo quality, not the camera's tricks and gimmicks.

Sony's SLT has some fun features as you mentioned. But the sweep panorama or high burst modes are more for fun than really improving your photo quality. Holding out your arms and use the live view to shoot photos is not a good technique to stabilize the camera, especially for a heavier camera or shooting telephoto action shots. So when a PS user upgrade to this type of camera, he/she must change the old PS habits and learn some new and better techniques if the whole purpose of upgrading is to improve photo quality. The difficult part of taking panorama shots is getting a good panoramic composition, not stitching the photos together (that can be easily done with softwares). But it can be a fun mode to use and quickly review/share the shot on the spot. As for the high burst mode, I can't help but feel that it is more of a marketing pitch at this point. Although it has 10 fps, the rest of the camera cannot quite live up to this caliber of performance (the lack of live view during this speed and long recovery make it quite annoying to use during fast actions capture).

Don't get me wrong, Sony's cameras are good. Unfortunately since Sony took over Minolta, it has some difficulty competing in the D-SLR market with Canon and Nikon. So building a new camera from ground up is a smart way for Sony to gain a new edge to sell its products. But SLT is a new technology which still needs some refinement. Whether SLT will be the new dominant technology or whether it will end up like the betamovie/betamax's extinction, nobody knows at this time.

So the newbie should go to a local store and try out the cameras, to see which one he/she likes. There is no real compeling reason to choose one over the other. If one likes the fun modes of Sony, then Sony will be a good choice. If one likes to have a camera system that has the best compatibility with third party wares, then Canon or Nikon will be a good choice.

I agree that the exact brand or manufacturer is not a factor and I absolutely agree that one should go to a local store and try out the different cameras (although some sellers will try to "push" a certain model or brand due to his/her own interests). I don't think the sweep panorama and the high burst are "fun" features - it is all about enabling the user to do more with his/her camera. Quick live view on my A300 was really helpful for me to do the transition from P&S to a DSLR since I knew that I didn't want to loose the ability to shoot using the LCD and it helped me learn the advantages of using the viewfinder (by comparing shots afterward on my PC).
I think that the comparison to betamax is wrong in this context since betamax was technically superior but it failed because of compatibility. All camera system today are incompatible with each other - you can not take a Nikon lens and simply connect it to a Cannon camera...
I think the Minolta DNA which runs now inside Sony is creating some new and exciting technologies as Minolta used to do in the past (after-all they release the first SLR with an integrated TTL autofocus system)

I guess everyone has a different standard. To me a serious panoramic shot will need a tripod and careful consideration of the composition to give the unique space and depth of your vision or to give a sense of scale to the vast composition that one trys to take in. And this one is a serious panoramic camera:
http://www.linhof.de/technorama-e.html

The Sony cameras start this sweep panoramic shot in PS camera. When I look at this ad, I really cannot help but feel that this is meant as a fun feature:
http://www.photoxels.com/taylor-swift-sony-sweep-panorama-ad/

As for the 10fps fast burst, this is usually in the realm of the most serious D-SLR like the Nikon D3s or Canon 1D Mark IV. Both of these have incredibly sophisticated AF system and hugh buffer to match the speed. To capture fast actions, one typically track the subject and do fast bursts at peak action. The Sony SLT has no live view to track the subject at 10fps, has no aperture control and it blacks out up to 50 seconds after the bursts. This is unacceptable for serious sports fast action photography. So that is why I say it is a fun feaure.

But like I said, everyone has a different standard. I'm not trying to put down Sony in any form. I think the Sony SLT camera is a very interesting innovation. And I can't wait to see what other manufacturers will respond to such a challenge. Competitions always lead to more innovations and benefit customers like us. I love Sony products, many of my electronics are from Sony.

You can still do "serious" panoramic shots with the SLT cameras and you can do everything other entry level DSLR do and much more. I think that Sony, being the underdog in the DSLR market is pushing the envelop on innovation and challenging both Nikon and Canon.
I've used the 10fps burst mode and got some beautiful action photos which would have been hard to reproduce using another DSLR camera in the same price range.
Eventually, I see these as additional features that give me more choice when taking photos

...and fun is also important

This thread has been extremely helpful because I have narrowed my scope down to these 2 camera's. The question i have is in regards to the Movie recording feature. I know that Canon puts a limit of 4gb on their movie recording, thus limiting movie recording to about 10 minutes. I am wondering if Sony has put a similar limitation in their new SLT or if it is a limitation of the memory cards. I have tried to do research on this and have not found the answer as of yet.

The A55 would not be the choice if you are looking for shooting for longer periods and wanting image stabilization. It will hit the same 4GB wall that the Canon will, if you turn off the stabilization. Sony only has a couple of lens, from the cheaper third party manufacturers, to utilize image stabilization in the lens instead of the body. There are loads of stabilized Canon lenses. The reason I say this is because the A55 has overheating problems when utilizing the in-body stabilization with video.

There have also been user reports, on dpreview.com, of overheating with just shooting stills in higher temperatures. This does not seem to happen with all the A55's, so it goes back to the "1rst generation" discussion. I, myself, never buy first generation products to become live beta testers for the company, only to find that the later generations perform much better and I'm stuck with an inferior product.

I would recommend the A55 for video and still shots. It's just simply amazing. I've been using it for around a month now and i still haven't fully explored every feature. Not mentioning the Sweep Panorama which is my favorite out of all of them. And to popular belief it is actually quite easy to take a Panorama without a tripod. I simply extend the camera as far as the neck strap allows and slowly pan; and ends up perfect.

And I'm not sure what camera's other people are using but my A55 does not black out for 50 seconds after a burst. With the image preview on it blacks out for 5 seconds even after a full burst. And with image preview off. There is no black out at all LOL - (whoever didn't know that is a failure NO OFFENSE) And i can get back to shooting straight away.

Even if the pics are a continuously updating slide-show as you take them. 10 fps is a pretty fast slide-show. So it shows no problems for me in Sports Action, and it is quite also quite easy to pan in my opinion.